FAKE PUTIN VISITS DAGESTAN

 

It is well known that almost everything in Russia is fake. This is especially the true when it comes to public, "press the flesh" appearances by President Vladimir Putin, such as "his" supposed recent visit to Dagestan. In cases like this, it is almost invariably one of Putin's doubles who does the honours. 

Here we see what is supposed to be Putin "up close and personal" with an eager crowd of Dagestani citizens, who are obviously keen to be photographed with their "hero." Possibly they want to thank him for sending their relatives off to die in his failing war, or maybe they are just bussed-in actors. 

The real Putin, when he makes an appearance, for example when other world leaders visit the Kremlin, invariably avoids contact with other people and employs extreme "social distancing."

"THE NEXT HITLER"

Yet more evidence that the professional "Anti-Nazi Industrial Complex" of the SPLC and the ADL have failed in its attempts to deradicalise Zoomers: Nick Fuentes promotes an "America First" event by calling himself the "Next Hitler" and everyone knows it's "just a troll" and "nothing to get worked up about." But also Fuentes and his followers literally believe most of the things that Hitler believed, and the SPLC and the ADL have actually helped them to believe that. 

SUPREME COURT BANS RACE-BASED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN EDUCATION

Luke Ford comments on the US Supreme Court's decision to reverse the anti-meritocratic system of "affirmative action" in education. Is the Civil Rights Industrial Complex about to crumble to dust or will it accentuate inequality, lead to the rise of a "caste system," and fracture America along race lines?

NOT SURE IF GONZALEZ "JEW HATE" LEAK HURTS OR HELPS DeSANTIS

Breitbart have just dropped a massive bombshell on "Conservative influencer" Pedro Gonzalez, spilling a shit-ton of anti-Semitic private messages.

Apparently this was done not because Gonzalez is an anti-Semite, which he is (obviously), but because he has been working tirelessly to boost the presidential campaign of his fellow Hispanic Ron DeSantis against GOP front-runner Donald Trump. 

Here is one of the many leaked messages with a cartoon that could have come straight from the Russia-backed Neo-Nazi Daily Stormer site:

And here is another one:

You might think that this would all be pretty damning for Gonzalez and DeSantis, but the fact is that groups like the ADL and the SPLC have done so badly countering anti-Semitism in America that it is now more widespread than ever, especially among several key GOP constituencies like Christcons and Hispanics. 

It is therefore too early to tell if the DeSantis campaign being associated with rampant anti-Semitism is necessarily a negative.

It's not even sure if it will hurt DeSantis's donor base, which you might think would be more "sensitive" to such accusations. This is because donor money is usually smart enough to know the difference between energising voter bases with anti-Semitic dog-whistles to gain power, and then exerting influence on that power behind the scenes. 

FAILED COUP DAMAGES PUTIN

Vlad Vexler speculates on why the Wagner Coup didn't go all the way and explains why it greatly weakens Putin nonetheless.

THE WAGNER COUP: WHEN THE MICRO DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, GO MACRO

by Colin Liddell

Some of the greatest minds of our time are struggling to make sense of the recent events in Russia -- an apparent coup, followed by a video from the Putin Fuhrer Bunker denouncing the "heroic rebels", followed by a sordid deal, and then a "nothing to see here" approach to follow up.

My own "insta take" was that Prigozhin was no mug and that once he pierced the façade of Kremlin power, he would face much less resistance than expected, which, I have to say, hasn't held up too badly. But what are we to make of the outcome? 

First of all, nobody seems to know exactly how this mess was resolved. Was it a deal, and if so, what kind of a deal? 

Is it true that Prigozhin "won" and that he will get what he wants -- the head of Defence Minister Shoigu and removing the core of the Wagner group from the hamburger factory of the Ukrainian war? Who knows? 

Then there is a whole level of conspiracy theories that say that Prigozhin was putting on an act with the full approval of Putin himself for "reasons", and that Putin's image as a strong ruler, while it temporarily flickered, can just be airbrushed back into existence by the "post-truth," Wizard of Oz society that he has created in Russia. Just drop a few more memes of him riding a horse with his moobs out!

Is Putin just a glove puppet with his hand up his own arse?

In short, it's a rat's nest of truths, half-truths, lies, lies-that-seem-true, truths-that-seem-false, fake news, disinfo, bad memes, blatant contradictions, logic streams that lead nowhere, etc., etc.

If you are caught up arguing the detail of any of this, shifting in and out of the shadows of belief and disbelief, then you are part of that rat's nest. Maybe someone wants you in there. 

In cases like this, I am reminded of some liars I have encountered in my life, especially the sincere ones, who have countless reasons and details to back up why "this" happened or why they fucked "that" up.

My standard response to people like this was always the same -- don't get sucked into the detail. Don't be subsumed in the mirco. It will waste your time and energy. Notice who they are, ascribe to them an accurate character that puts them in a nutshell, and leave them there like so many uncounted beans.

In other words, when the micro doesn't make sense, when it's rough, turgid, or clotted, simply step back and go macro. 

What we see in modern Russia is a society that has no reliable truth, no sense of shame or honour, no rock at its base. It is, as our long-lost Varangian cousins found when they glided over its shady, meandering rivers more than a thousand years ago, a shapeless wasteland of swamps and shifting sands, peopled by creatures that avoid eye contact.

Where truth, facts, logic, honour, and the other building blocks of the West are concerned, Russia is a cancer of all these things. We have seen enough to never take any of it at face value or seriously again, to consign it all to some shadowy dream world.

This leaves the question of ultimately what to do with that nebulous, murky space to the East of Europe. It has already partly poisoned the otherwise noble East and spread much of its filth to America and Europe, so it is not something that can or should be ignored.

The question, the big question, the macro question, is do we try to set up not a cordon sanitaire, but instead a cordon réalité to keep its lies and toxicity at bay, or do we seek somehow to colonize that vast shadowland of untruths and distortions, and if so how?

Whatever...

____________________

Follow @cbliddell

Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia). 

WAGNER COUP FINALLY EXPLAINED...

 

SHORTPOD (82): CAN PRIGOZHIN WIN?

The leader of the Wagner mercenary group, Yevgeny Prigozhin, has just launched a coup ostensibly aimed at the incompetent Russian High Command. Anything could happen and predictions will have a high causality rate.

PRIGOZHIN'S "MARCH ON MOSCOW"

Is it "habbening"? Is Yevgeny Prighozin the leader of the Wagner Mercenary Group finally going off the reservation? Time to break out the popcorn and listen to the analysis of Vlad Vexler...

TED KACYNSKI WAS ONLY EVER A BAD MEME (PUSHED BY THE RUSSIANS)

In my view, Ted Kacynski (aka The Unabomber) was never anything more than a bad meme, in all probability pushed by the KGB and its successors, the FSB. This was because it was just the sort of thing to help radicalise environmentalist concerns and to push alienated young men in the West over the edge. Joseph Bronski explores the rather trite, shallow, and self-contradictory ideas that Kacynski used to justify his long, relatively low-fi career of terrorism. 

RAMZPAUL CO-HOST "TIINA" DEAD AT 38

Finnish(ed). Another Alt-Right casualty? 

Right-wing Finnish e-celeb Tiina Wiik died recently for, as yet, unknown reasons. She was only 37 or 38.

Also known under her real name, Linnéa Artemis Lokka, she was best known in the Dissident Right for being a co-host on RamZPaul's podcast, and, like RamZPaul, could reasonably be described as a "Neo-Nazi" and subscriber to the Dissident Right's "Semitic Panotheory."

Here she is having a fight with a guy in Paris because he is Jewish.

Linnean Artemis Wiiikin( Tiina) ja Junes Lokkan matka Parisiin meni loistavasti. He vetivät kännin ja joutuivat tappelun metrossa.
Kunnon haittamaahanmuuto meno. pic.twitter.com/AIGLQxXzEY

— Dmitry Gurbanov (@Dimmu141) April 25, 2022

She was also an enthusiastic supporter of the murderous Russian invasion of Ukraine. Of course!

In addition to her association with RamZPaul, she wrote for several "far-right" websites, such as the National Socialist Partisan and the neo-fascist Sarastus, and did a joint podcast with her husband Junes Lokka.

The usual suspects were quick to post their commiserations:

However, rival Alt-Right simp-magnet Lana, from Red Ice Radio, was rather more catty, blaming Tiina's decision to get vaxxed for her death, as usual without any evidence. 

ARE PERFECTLY INNOCENT TERRORIST ATTACKS BEING EXPLAINED AWAY AS SINISTER DOMESTIC ACCIDENTS?

Paris

Terrorism is "part and parcel" of life in a vibrant and enriched multicultural society. We have come to accept its rare outrages as a reasonable price to pay for ethnic cooking and not feeling too guilty about making life difficult for migrants. In fact, we would probably miss it if it was gone. 

However, it seems that there may now be a sinister plan under way to "repackage" these perfectly innocent terrorist attacks, often carried out for sincere Islamic reasons, as nasty domestic gas accidents. 

Here is the latest news from Paris:

Thirty-seven people have been injured, four of them seriously, after a large explosion in central Paris.

The blast took place in a building that housed a design school and the Catholic education system headquarters in Rue Saint-Jacques, in the fifth arrondissement of the French capital.

Emergency workers are searching through the wreckage of the building, with at least two thought to be missing.

Safe in the knowledge that terrorists had just struck, and that everything was now okay, I was getting ready to resume my life when I saw the next chilling line:

"According to witnesses, there was a strong smell of gas before the blast." 

I don't know about you, but as someone who uses gas, both in piped and cylindrical forms, I find this "explanation" deeply troubling. It means we are forced to worry about every single gas boiler and cylinder in existence -- and there are literally millions of them. Unlike Muslims, they are in almost every home.

Why oh why have the authorities chosen to create such a climate of terror and to spread hatred of gas appliances?

JIHAD AGAINST THE GAY STRAWS

Muslims in charge

by Edwin Oslan

Thank you, Muslims! In the hilarious sideshow known as woke, “intersectional” politics, where the progressive left crams a bunch of disparate groups (blacks, Orientals, gays, women, transsexuals, and Arabs/Muslims) together under one “big tent” of the oppressed – basically anyone who isn’t straight, white, male, and Christian – the Muslims of a little Metro Detroit burg called Hamtramck in the state of Michigan just passed an ordinance or law or some decree banning all displays of “Pride” from public government property.

Naturally the gays, lesbians, transsexuals, and other non-heterosexual types are pissed off, which is, of course, hilarious.

But, let’s talk about Hamtramck. Hamtramck is a tiny city within a city, where its limits are bordered on all sides by the more popularly known garbage dump called Detroit and a slightly lesser known garbage dumb called Highland Park. In fact, it’s in such close proximity with Detroit, that yours truly had his car stolen there! Weee! So, in other words, Hamtramck is essentially a couple squares miles of Detroit that just goes by another name. As such, this mini-city is basically pre-Giuliani scummy New York, where freaks and arty types live dirt cheap, braving a few muggings and car thefts, so they can avoid getting fulltime jobs, but mixed with the progressive political attitudes of Portland or San Francisco.

It’s basically where terminal teenagers, LARPing as punk rockers, metal heads, European soccer fans, goths, freaks, weirdos, and other assorted wannabe “anti-society” rebels, live and go to shoebox-sized bars that can’t be bothered to have proper wheelchair access, but serve their drinks with paper straws and decorate their walls with BLM signs and Pride flags, just so you know that they’re on the “right side of history”; some of these are even funded with cocaine money. I know because I go there all the time to the few clubs I’m not banned from. Don’t yell at me! I can’t help it if some of my favorite metal bands play these shithole little bars!

There’s just one tiny problem. The population of Hamtramck is heavily Muslim, and the council is entirely Islamic.

And, so, they banned all Pride displays from what’s considered public or government property. At first, I had a major hate boner from all the schadenfreude, mistakenly thinking the council made it illegal to even display pride swag on private businesses themselves, which would be ultra-hilarious. But, no, you can’t really DO that, because we still ostensibly have the first amendment.

"Invite the world, in-fight with the world"

However, just banning pride displays from public places is enough to raise the ire of the non-heterosexuals and their political “allies.” First of all, what’s considered a “public space”? Does that mean, you’re not allowed to have a Pride parade in a public park? I already saw a couple of fire hydrants defaced, er, I mean “decorated” with Pride stickers, which I know is a misdemeanor. So, as far as I’m concerned, just the logistics of such an ordinance will lead to some rather “interesting” conflicts in the future. What if someone puts up a flyer for a pro-Pride event on a telephone pole?

But, secondly, and more amusingly, how did the gays, lesbians, and transsexuals populating this little hipster burg not see this coming? I know some of these people are probably “Queers for Palestine”, but they can’t all be this stupid. Muslims are pretty vocal about how much they hate gays, lesbians, and transsexuals, and they actively execute them in their own countries. Did these morons think that, just because the progressive coalition thinks of them as victims of straight, white, male, Christian “oppression”, that they’d all of a sudden learn that “love is love”?

When defending these actions, council member Nayeem Choudhury said, “We want to respect the religious rights of our citizens,” and denied that the action was bigoted. “We love everybody. We don’t hate anybody. We don’t discriminate (against) anybody. We are living very respectfully without hate,” he said. But, come on…

Personally speaking, I have no dog in the fight. I tend to see the enemy of my enemy as my friend, and I think it would be hilarious if the Muslims went all the way and turned Hamtramck into Halaltramck, outlawing all alcohol, pork, and metal shows, having calls to prayer in the streets, and otherwise being a nuisance and a disruptive force for the hipsters and other woke jackasses living in this two or so square mile “city.” But I don’t want it branching outward into other parts of Metro Detroit. And, to be sure, I’ve been seeing more burqas on women’s heads nearly everywhere I go now, and I do wonder if we’re going to go the way of Sweden, France, and Germany, with their no-go zones and public “migrant” rape-a-thons.

On the other hand, everything has gotten so gay lately, with drag queens reading to little kids in schools, elementary school teachers teaching kids about “alternative lifestyles”, and, of course, the recent Bud Light and Target kerfuffles.  Apparently there’s going to be a protest in Hamtramck this upcoming Saturday, June 24th, and we all know that Muslims, Arabs, and other assorted dusky types aren’t afraid of getting their hands dirty. So, this should fun to watch.

But, at the end of the day, if the Muslims do end up taking over, could they please ban paper straws as well? Those are pretty gay too.  

It's kicking off! Is the LGBTQ+ community about to have its Charlottesville?

QUEER CULTURE: AN INTRODUCTION

Audio version

“I don’t think you can really be proud of being gay because it isn’t something you’ve done. You can only be proud of not being ashamed.”
-Quentin Crisp

by Pilleater

What is “queer culture?”

Well, are you queer yourself? Or would like to know more about such things?

I explain “queerness” here for the "misguided artist," by which I mean the millennial deluded art school student who doesn't understand why everything is so decadent today, and why it’s being promoted.

As a liberal, would you consider gay or trans rights “decadent?” No. That’s “normal.” But at times, it can be “queer” to prove a moral point against the norms of society.

If you know about the origins of the word “queer,” you probably know it used to mean “strange” or “eccentric.” Today, it means being a homosexual, or a part of some sexual identity political group. That’s only a surface level understanding of the term.

It is true that the LGBT community has taken over what was left of queer culture, and since added the letter Q to their program. However, being a "queer" requires more effort than simply being a sexual deviant. It also means investing oneself in a subculture that has origins in punk rock, criminal gangs, homeless squatting, hedonistic night life, strange intellectualism, and prostitution.

Recall back in the 1950's, the white normative and cisgendered “club” would mock the outsider as being a "nerd," or as a “queer.” There was even a recess game called “smear the queer.” Being normal was all the rage. The boys hung out with the boys, and the girls hung out with the girls. There was only the stereotypes of “Johnny” and “Jane.” The nerd was kicked to the side, otherwise known as a “Melvin,” who worked with his toy chemical set, or read a lot of books.

Reading is an anti-masculine virtue. Only nerds read. Melvin was picked on by Johnny because he read. Jane ignored Melvin because he couldn’t supply her with anything. Melvin was also either fat, skinny, ugly, or just didn't understand the rules of the normative culture of Ohio (or any suburban doldrum out there).

Kids like Melvin later grew up and read William S. Burroughs, did LSD, or became a promiscuous hippy. Other hardcore Melvins became “postmodern” philosophers, and tried to doubt the normative structure of American society. Melvin finally had his "Revenge of the Nerds” fantasy in his later years. But in the current year of 2023 and beyond, the terminology of “queerness” has also drastically changed.

A new generation of Melvins came about, and are dubbed as “incels," or as internet trolls. We live in a time where the normative culture of today has been hijacked by the nerd culture of the past and now tries to woo those disgruntled Melvins in positions of power, who are also known as “the transgressive liberal elite.” From the 1950s up until today, the elite had a spiteful and resentful attitude towards the “queer culture” of the past, which became normalized. Hence why we so often think of “queer culture” as belonging to homosexuality.

No. Queer culture means an eccentric and strange outsider culture against the normative.

Under our neoliberal capitalist system, “individuals” have to find their own uniqueness and apply their “skills” to an oversaturated market. Capitalism requires unnecessary cultural competition. This means one has to prove “authenticity” over irony or being a poser. The real queers now have to fight against fake queers, and the system must cater to the interest of their perverted individualism. Capitalism thus becomes “woke capitalism” and advocates the subcultures of resistance.

Queer culture has gained popularity in the arts because it is a reflection of the values of liberalism and free-market liberation. “Queers” use money and burn it. There is no profit return unless its about selling an ideology of Americanism. In other words: “You can’t be a queer anywhere else, but you can be queer in America!”

The middle class becomes fascinated with queer culture because it offers cosmopolitan values against suburban privatization and mundane subculture. The petite bourgeoise is about emulation, mimicry, and fitting in to what the elites want. And because the elite are made up of resentful Melvins, the middle class develops a hatred against Johnny and Jane.

The queer elite can range anywhere from Michael Jackson, R. Kelly, Kevin Spacey, Jeffery Epstein, or any celebrity than can practice depraved acts without any restrictions. They have the money and power that puts them above the law. Queers ultimately want the power to pursue this freedom. The far-right may call queers "degenerate" and “Jewish," but this is a misconception. Queers are not limited to the categories of elitism, but range from Trash-TV celebrities and culture revolutionaries that normal people are repulsed by. Even Nazis, (especially gay Nazis) are by default, queer. So, one is hated by society, but one is also “queer.”

What remains is a progressive-stack or "snowflake" war between the queer elite and the queer underclass trying to find an authentic (or “true queer”) life under capitalism.

In 2023, art, music, literature, culture, and experience is judged by how queer it is. Someone is uplifted in this system is they are against whiteness, love cosmopolitanism, and against normative behavior. Normative values were the thing of past, and the queer now reigns supreme.

Ultimately, queer culture is a pretentious phenomenon. It’s about a “fake it till you make it” scenario of acting. It assumes art is more powerful than politics. Politics is often modeled on the concept of "the good life,” and art is the bourgeois luxury and expression outside the urge of social control. The artist sees the world and shapes it to their own liking, while the philistine submits to the established order. Hence the vibe between the queer and the normative.

Queers can never agree upon the same thing, as queerness conflicts against itself. I would argue and say that eccentric political science, creative writing, dedicated research, and social commentary naturally belongs in a “queer” category. It’s not asking to be apart of the egalitarian queer culture club, but in it’s natural environment, we can judge queerness like we do with Christian Weston Chandler and Terry A. Davis.

For the sake of clarity, anyone on the far-right is “queer” because of their hatred against the liberal world. The older Melvins might get upset over this, as their previous zeitgeist went against this idea. But queerness intersects, and anyone who is a character of eccentric interest is immediately a queer. Queers are studied on Encyclopedia Dramatica and Kiwi Farms for good reasons. We should study queerness as a priority to understand subculture, ideology, artistic intentions, and reasoning before we get any ideals of sincerity. Queerness can be sincere, and we have to discover that. We can appreciate the arts if we appreciate the queer, first.

More about “queer culture” is elaborated in the humorous Bob Black punk pamphlet of the same name. You can buy it here.

Also published at Endless Nameless

DID RISHI DUMP THE PARTYGATE VID TO FINISH OFF RIVAL BORIS?

In what seems like a highly suspicious move to discredit former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the first video of one of the so-called "Partygate" parties has finally dropped, two-and-a-half years after it was taken. 

As reported by the Guardian: 

The video, obtained by the Mirror, shows members of staff drinking alcohol at the gathering in London on 14 December 2020, and mocking lockdown rules the public were following at the time. At least 24 people were in attendance, including Shaun Bailey – made a peer in Boris Johnson’s resignation honours list – whose campaign team organised the event. He left before the video was taken.

Ben Mallet, who was awarded an OBE in Johnson’s honours list, is pictured wearing Christmas braces and a blue tie. Mallet was the Conservatives’ campaign director for the 2021 London mayoral election and is running Moz Hossain’s mayoral campaign.

In the video, two people appear to dance past a sign saying “Please keep your distance” before colliding with a table full of buffet food. In the background, someone can be heard saying: “As long as we don’t stream that we’re like, bending the rules.”

What makes this remarkable is that it is the only video yet of one of these parties to be released -- we have just had photos and testimony -- and, secondly, it was dropped just a few days after a "war" broke out in the Tory Party between present Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and former Prime Minister Boris Johnson over the latter's resignation honours list.

Behind this conflict is Johnson's belief that he was "unfairly" and "undemocratically" removed from power and his hope to position himself to become leader of the Conservative Party again following the next General Election, which Sunak is widely expected to lose. 

By dropping the video now, enemies of Johnson make it harder for him to seek a safe Tory seat before the election and thus to campaign to succeed Sunak. From Sunak's point of view, totally removing Johnson from the picture also helps to solidify the party behind him going into next year's election and thus slightly improves his chances of escaping defeat.

THE TOXIC TWINS, RUSSIA AND THE WEST, ARE NOT QUITE THE SAME

Also available on Archive

Russia has no allies, only Third World countries that believe its latest bullshit

by Colin Liddell

Russia should probably be destroyed as an overcentralised state and replaced with a range of smaller, pleasanter states. But why just Russia and not China, America, or some other "oversized" state? The answer is simple: toxicity. Russia has always been toxic in ways that its other oversized rivals have not.

This was not always apparent, and for a time - in the Zeroes - it even looked like Russia might possibly provide a healthy ideological counterweight to the toxic liberalism of the West. Yes, I also admit that the West is toxic. In fact, I have insisted on it for years. But there is toxicity and there is toxicity. Not all toxicities are the same. Some toxicities are "more equal" than others, and Russian toxicity is the worst.

Why is this?

Western toxicity has certain built-in constraints. However mad the West may be about its ideology of atomisation, LGBTQ+, individual rights, racial reparations, etc., that same individualist and expressionist ideology limits the degree to which it can weaponise and regiment its people to project its ideology. The poisonousness of the West mainly poisons itself, and, after a time, may even be supposed to produce a healthier backlash. 

In short, the West will not seriously fight to enforce its sick ideology, because even a few hundred body bags will become an issue, as will the lack of transgender facilities in the trenches. It is an unimperial empire. Effectively it has imprisoned itself in a kind of "Vietnam anti-war counter-culture" writ large. 

Another constraint on the West is its open society. The West can go mad, and we have seen various iterations of that, but there is always the capability for saner minds to push back. A few years ago, it looked like the woke mob was taking over completely, but now that term is almost always used in derision, and there is plenty of pushback. The tone of hysteria has also greatly diminished, if not completely. 

Russia lacks both of these constraints on its toxicity. The present war has shown that it can ruthlessly sacrifice tens of thousands of its citizens' lives with low political cost to its elites; while the more insane the state narrative becomes the less it is challenged by the so-called "saner" minds supposedly in Russia.

In fact, the main worry of many Russia analysts is that Putin may be forced out by an even harder hard-liner. Putin, it seems, represents the "mushy middle" of the Russian state.

Disposable Putin thug 

But let's focus more on the peculiar nature of Russian toxicity. What does it consist of? Quite simply: the total bending of truth to suit an anchored political narrative. 

If we try to focus on macro-essence and contrast this with the West's toxicity, the West represents the breaking down of truth/objectivity to suit economic interests, while Russia represents the same thing to suit political interests. This should not be surprising, as Russia is not an economy and never successfully became one. It has always been a polity and little else.

In themselves economic interests and political interests are not necessarily human interests, but economics has always been less able to escape the gravity of reality than politics. This is an important difference. Russian toxicity bends and twists the truth, while the West's toxicity breaks it down and disassembles it. This is a key distinction.

It is the nature of political toxicity to bend truth, to invert and contort reality into elaborate and outlandish patterns, and ultimately this is more dangerous and unhealthy.

Western toxicity, by contrast -- driven by economics and the economic urge to maintain flows -- tends towards the granular and the fluid. This allows relatively sane or non-toxic structures to be occasionally rebuilt, rather like sandcastles, although, like sandcastles, they are seldom strong. Russian toxicity, by contrast, is more like the heating and bending of ropes of glass. Yes, there too there is an element of weakness, brittleness to be exact.

All Russian distortions serve one purpose and one purpose only: the perpetuation and dominance of the overcentralised Russian state, whether boyar, tsar, commissar, or KGB flunky is in nominal charge.

When that state is weaker than its rivals, as today, the cry is "multipolarity", when it is equal it is "Eurasianism", and when it looks like it might be stronger then "Universal socialism" or "The Third Rome" is the refrain. The only constant is Kremlin interest.

Let us consider some examples: "Russia is the New Rome"! How ludicrous is that? Then we had the Tsars and their Germanic-led, Potemkin-village facsimile of European society (this is what Tartovsky's Solaris is really about), followed by the absurdity (and toxic potency) of the Soviet State as both "slave" and enslaver, and the encore by the Putinist State attempting to reheat all these broken shards and meld them into the present day absurdity of Russia as the anti-colonialist leader of "Pan Africanism." Yes, seriously!

Putin with African leaders sharing tips on corruption
and  kleptocracy (Russian "hostesses" not shown)

Putin has been hanging out with his African buddies in St Petersburg, and our old friend Alexander Dugin has now fully formulated this into his latest crackpot thesis for deployment by Russia's online army of shills and bots.  According to this nonsense, Africa is "oppressed" by the West and needs Chinese debt traps and Russian Wagner mercenary groups to ensure its "freedom," rather than simply getting its act together. 

Political toxicity of the kind Russia has been producing on an industrial scale for centuries is always worse than the West's  economic toxic by-product. One attempts to coil itself around the world and choke reality to death in a swirl of relentless and tedious distortions, memes, and propaganda aimed at the low IQ masses, while the other allows its "subjects" to vote with their feet and constantly walk back into the light, if they so choose. 

____________________

Follow @cbliddell

Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia). 

WHY IS THE RIGHT-WING SO STUPID THESE DAYS?

Luke Ford talks to Dennis Dale about the stupidity of the Right-wing. Is it because right-wingers accept the egalitarian premises of the Left or is it a perverse psychological tendency to lose?

VIGILS INSTEAD OF VIGILANTES: BRITAIN HOLDS RITUAL OF DE-DEMOCRATIZED RACIAL PACIFICATION IN NOTTINGHAM

 

by Duns Scotus

The low fertility society of Britain has held yet another ceremony of "de-democratised racial pacification" following a racially-charged spate of murders, in which a West African man stabbed three people to death and then attempted to kill others by running them over in a van.

During the quasi-ritual ritual, which took place in Nottingham City centre before a disproportionately white audience, the relatives of the victims were carefully vetted and pre-programmed with suitable inclusivist and NAXALT messaging, then trundled out to recite heart-warming messages designed to diffuse racial tensions and emphasise racial togetherness.

Recommended listening in the UK in the immediate 

aftermath of a serious "diversity malfunction"

One of the victim's mothers, Emma Webber, said the killer was a "monstrous individual" but told the crowd with tears in her eyes:

"He is just a person. Please hold no hate that relates to any colour, sex or religion."

The other participants, including civic and religious leaders, repeated similar messages with calls not to "give in to hate," etc.

It is not known whether Mrs Webber's words will align with actual police practise, as males, people of unassimilated ethnic backgrounds, and migrants with mental problems have been secretly profiled by police in the past in the UK, albeit with limited effectiveness, and may well continue to be secretly profiled by police in the future.

What is important, however, at this time is that the average citizens of Britain do not start to do their own profiling, racial or otherwise, as this would amount to "vigilantism" and make the low-fertility society of Britain, which relies upon heavy infusions of ethnic diversity, completely unworkable.

Being stabbed in the street by "not a British citizen 

but he has settled status" is our greatest strength

SHORTPOD (81): THE DEATH OF SILVIO BERLUSCONI

NeoKrat Editor Colin Liddell comments on the recent death of Silvio Berlusconi, the ex-Italian Prime Minister. Was he the template for the populist politician now common today and who did he influence? Also, what was his most important legacy and why did a witness in a corruption case against him die of nuclear poisoning? All this discussed in just over 5 minutes!

Death of a witness. 

MALCOLM COLLINS ON "PROSPERITY-INDUCED FERTILITY COLLAPSE"

Pronatalist Malcolm Collins in conversation with Chris Williamson on the many issues connected to the tendency in advanced economies for people to simply stop having kids. Along with general prosperity, gender equality and education appear to be additional determinants of this genocidal trend. 

WHEN MEXICO "BUILT THE WALL" AND MADE THE USA PAY FOR IT

Also available on YouTube, BitChute, and Odysee  

"Please come to America. We don't care if you're illegal."

by Colin Liddell

Whenever some shit-kicking American politician tries to sound tough on immigration, one of the things you're likely to hear is that 1950s Republican president Dwight D. Eisenhower was tough on immigration and pulled no punches when it came to deporting migrants. 

Now, Donald Trump, possibly on the edge of going to prison, is once again shooting from the hip on the populist issue of immigration restriction. Right on cue, he has invoked Eisenhower's name, saying that if he is elected he will arbitrarily deport millions of "undocumented migrants", just like Eisenhower did:

Trump is wrong on Eisenhower. The US kicked out the Mexicans in Operation Wetback because the Mexican government told them to. pic.twitter.com/Iy49tFSNIh

— Colin Liddell (@cbliddell) June 11, 2023

What he is referring to here is "Operation Wetback," Eisenhower's supposed deportation of over a million Mexican migrants in 1954.

This has long been a trope on the Conservative, nationalist, and Neo-Nazi right(s). However, what is seldom pointed out, is that Eisenhower was not acting from a racialist, nationalist, ethno-nationalist, or even a civic nationalist impulse -- or even out of concern for the negative effect of mass immigration on American wages. He was simply doing it because the Mexicans were pushing him to kick the Mexicans out of America.

Yes, it was literally Mexico that was "building the wall" and making the USA pay for it in 1954!

What Mexico wanted was extraterritorial 

control of its labour force in the USA

Here is Wikipedia on the topic:

During World War II, the Mexican and American governments developed an agreement known as the Bracero program, which allowed Mexican laborers to work in the United States under short-term contracts in exchange for stricter border security and the return of illegal Mexican immigrants to Mexico. Instead of providing military support to the U.S. and its military allies, Mexico would provide laborers to the U.S. with the understanding that border security and illegal labor restrictions would be tightened by the United States. The United States agreed, based upon a strong need for cheap labor to support its agricultural businesses, while Mexico hoped to utilize the laborers returned from the United States to boost its efforts to industrialize, grow its economy, and eliminate labor shortages.

First of all, understand that the term "illegal Mexican immigrants" did not mean "illegal Mexican migrants to America" but instead "illegal Mexican migrants from Mexico." There was no such thing as an "illegal Mexican migrant to America" until 1965.

Under the 1924 Immigration Act, immigration from anywhere in the Western Hemisphere to America was allowed. Emigration from Mexico, however, was a different story. This was allowed or not allowed only with the permission of the Mexican government. 

The 1924 Immigration Act is another favourite trope of White Nationalists and Neo-Nazis seeking to make the case that the USA was an "ethnostate" before the Jews supposedly ruined everything with the 1965 Immigration Act. 

In fact, like most things in US politics, the 1924 Immigration Act was cobbled together to inconsistently represent the contradictory interests of various local state elites and electorates. The main driving factors behind the Act were:

• The animosity felt by Californians towards East Asians
• The general animosity towards anarchists (most of whom were of Italian or East European Jewish backgrounds). This followed a spate of terrorist incidents.
• The farming interests in the Southern states that wanted cheap Mexican migrant labour.

Meanwhile, the bête noire of the nationalist Right, the 1965 Immigration Act, supposedly foisted on America by a "Jewish-controlled" political class, actually introduced restrictions on Hispanic migration for the first time.

Wikipedia:

The 1965 act also imposed the first cap on total immigration from the Americas, marking the first time numerical limitations were placed on immigration from Latin American countries, including Mexico.

Yes, it is literally amazing how "arse-over-tit" the Dissident Right has got its history of immigration!

The fact is that the major drag factor on America's hunger for cheap Hispanic labour was always the Mexican government, which realised early on that Mexico's massive pool of cheap labour was a fantastic way to attract inward investment. Allowing that labour to stray over the border was simply not in their interest, unless it could be regulated to their benefit.

When WWII came along, America was afflicted by severe labour shortages as millions left to join the military. This effectively gave Mexico the whip hand when Washington came knocking on its door and started the talks that set up the Bracero Program labour scheme.

What Mexico wanted was  extraterritorial control of its labour force in the USA, while also benefiting from the capital that it generated, much of which would be sent home to Mexico. The Bracero Program was designed to do exactly this. Mexicans were licenced to work in the US, and thus able to be recalled, whilst sending back a lot of their earnings while they worked in the USA. This economic boost greatly contributed to Mexico enjoying a rising population with sharply rising living standards in the 1940s and 50s. Mexico greatly profited off WWII.

Source

The thing that the Mexican government was most worried about, understandably, was illegal migrants from Mexico. Remember, these were only "illegal" in America when the US government chose to enforce its international agreement with the Mexican government.

Back to Wikipedia:

After [the Bracero Program] agreement was reached, the Mexican government continued pressuring the United States to strengthen its border security or face the suspension of the legal stream of Mexican laborers entering the United States. In October 1948, Immigration officials opened the Texas- Mexico border which allowed several thousand undocumented workers to cross the border. From here most workers were escorted by Border Patrol agents straight to the cotton fields. This event started the informal practice of using undocumented Mexican labor while the blacklist was in place. This incident was problematic due to the direct way the US government was involved in the managing and movement of these undocumented workers.

Yes that's right: the US government was basically pimping illegal labour, creating a diplomatic problem with its neighbour.

The Mexican response was to consider tighter border security, while insisting that America get its act together and fulfil its international agreements. 

Alberto Maldonado Garcia, a phD candidate at Berkeley has studied the period in some detail:

In an attempt to get a handle on the situation, President Manuel Ávila Camacho ordered Lázaro Cárdenas (who served as National Defense Secretary for the duration of World War II) in February 1945 to determine how many military units would be needed to help migratory officials effectively supervise the border. Ávila Camacho’s order came two weeks after General Eulogio Ortiz, the commanding officer of the 7th Military Zone, which included northeastern Mexico, reported in a letter to the state governors that an estimated 200 undocumented braceros were entering the U.S. every day in his jurisdiction. General Ortiz then suggested that his fellow Zone Commanders cooperate with the state governors and local-level agrarian authorities to develop a strategy to curb undocumented entries into the United States. 

But the military aid ordered by Ávila Camacho and desired by Ortiz appears to have never materialized. On December 18, 1945, the CTM – Confederación de Trabajadores de México, the national-level industrial labor union affiliated with the ruling PRI – affiliate in Mexicali reported that military patrols between that city and San Luis, Sonora might be necessary in order to stem the flow of migrant labor entering the United States. Two days later, Eugenio Elorduy, the president of the Baja California chapter of the National Chamber of Industry, recommended that four buses of army troops be assigned to the border. And in April 1946, General Ortiz repeated his plea for cooperation in a letter that was nearly identical to the one he had written in January 1945.

As you can see, the Mexicans were making sincere if only partially successful efforts to police their border, while America was doing next to nothing on its side. This led to growing pressure from the Mexican side on the US government to finally clamp down and stop the "theft" of Mexican labour. 

John William Weber details this in his dissertation, "The Shadow of the Revolution: South Texas, the Mexican Revolution, and the Evolution of Modern American Labor Relations":

"The response to these complaints about the operation of the program and the continued reliance of many growers on undocumented labor came in mid 1954 when the INS [Immigration and Naturalization Service] moved to entrench the bracero program further by making it the only game in town. The lack of Border Patrol activity in South Texas remained a poorly guarded secret in the early 1950s. In 1952 the Mexican government filed an official complaint with the Department of State after learning that the Border Patrol had been removed from large swaths of South Texas."

Indeed, the Texas Governor at the time, Allan Shivers, was apparently involved in reneging on America's international agreements:  

"Rumors circulated that the head of the Patrol ordered his officers to stay away from the South Texas farm of Governor Allan Shivers, a well-known and unapologetic employer of undocumented Mexican labor."

Cross-border labour enthusiast Allan Shivers

So, as you can see, Eisenhower's so-called decision to deport over a million braceros was actually a Mexican decision and one that was implemented in a long-overdue fashion due to constant American heel-dragging. 

Eisenhower's concerns were probably to maintain good relations with his Southern neighbour at a time of rising international tensions with the Soviet Union, while also furthering the federal integration and centralisation of the United States over the often divergent interests of its states and state elites.

For Trump to imply that he could do something similar is simply ludicrous. For deportations to happen, the total cooperation of the recipient country is needed. Eisenhower had even more than that. After all, it was Mexico that drove the 1954 deportations. 

In American narratives Mexicans have no agency

____________________

Follow @cbliddell

Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia).